Thursday, August 04, 2005

A noble cause?

Bush, apparently speaking to one of his carefully screened audiences in Texas, reportedly said to someone (or more) who had lost a child (or children) to the Iraq "war," they had died fighting for a "noble cause." I'm sorry to have to say it, but that is utter bullshit. I understand how someone who has lost a child fighting in Iraq would want to believe, indeed, would absolutely cling to the belief, that their child died fighting for a noble cause. Obviously no one would want to have to believe their child died fighting for an ignoble cause. But if their child died fighting in Iraq I'm sad to say that is what happened.

The Bush/Cheney/neocon attack on Iraq was a cowardly, illegal, immoral, unconstitutional, criminal act that had nothing to do with the so-called "war on terrorism." Iraq was not involved in the 9/11 attack on the twin towers. Iraq had no ties to bin Laden. Iraq was not a threat to the United States or even any of their neighbors. Decimated by years of sanctions, feeble and unable to adequately defend themselves, Iraq was a prime target for greedy imperialistic warmongers who saw an opportunity to control the second largest oil reserves in the world and probably control the oil supply in all of the Middle East. And by doing so they could also deny oil to China, India, Russia and others, all nations who would be demanding more and more oil in the future. It was a grand scheme and they have not given up on it yet. They have no intention of getting out of Iraq, at least not until they have established a puppet government and enough permanent bases to make sure it all works the way they wish. There is nothing noble whatsoever about this.

One cannot help but feel terrible about the loss of life that has occurred in Iraq, both American and Iraqi. I am sure it must be absoluely devastating to have lost a child in this undeclared and illegal "war." But I see no way one could possibly conclude that any noble cause was involved. I suppose one could argue that now they are fighting "terrorists," but there were no such terrorists in Iraq until we unconscionably attacked there. Furthermore, why are people trying to defend their country from foreign occupiers considered terrorists? We are the invaders, the terrorists. The behavior of our troops in Iraq makes this entirely clear. Our invasion of this sovereign nation and our treatment of Iraqi civilians will quite probably never be forgiven. Never!

There is no way this can be spun into a "noble cause." And the argument that we cannot just "cut and run" because of international law is at this point simply laughable. We have totally ignored international law up until now, violated virtually every rule and law involved, and now we want to claim to have to observe international law? And we also pretend to be concerned about what would happen to Iraq if we left? What concern did we have for Iraq when we engaged in this miserable and illegal invasion? If we ever had any moral high ground in world affairs (a myth of monumental proportions) we have certainly forfeited it by now. Unless Bush/Cheney and their gang of international thugs are held responsible for their crimes there is no chance the United States can ever recover its place in the international community, no matter how strong our military might be. You cannot force your desires and beliefs on others by brute strength. If we didn't realize this before Iraq is surely reminding us of this basic fact.